Perceptions and Experiences of Victimization in Alberta: Findings from a Survey of Alberta Adults, 2000-2001 PDF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In January 1999 discussions held at the Alberta Summit on Justice resulted in a list of 25 core recommendations.Several of the recommendations were related to issues concerning victimization. A major concern was that the justice system needs to be more effective in providing and supporting active and meaningful roles for victims within the justice process. Another concern was that victims be given appropriate and adequate support in terms of, for example, education and counselling. Recommendations also called for more and better use of victim impact statements. Additionally, the need was expressed for members of the justice system to be more sensitive to and aware of the issues and experiences surrounding victimization. Discussions from the Summit provided the rationale and focus for conducting this research project. The purpose of this project was primarily to examine the extent to which Albertans experience victimization and the nature and consequences of that experience. Traditional conceptualizations of victimization have adopted a legal definition of victimization. There has been increasing recognition, however, of a need for a broader approach by recognizing that victimization is also experienced outside of the legal realm. This research addressed this issue by providing survey-based data on victimization experiences. As well, this research offers an alternative measure of victimization than what is reported in official police statistics such as the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey. 1.2 Objectives of the Project This research project has the following main objectives: 1. To collect data in order to: (a) examine the nature of victimization; (b) measure the scope of victimization; (c) identify the needs of victims; and (d) examine the impact of victimization on different groups. 2. To review current provincial and federal legislation, as well as selected legislation in other countries, in the area of victimization. 3. To compare the context of victimization experiences that are reported as part of an official process as compared to experiences not officially reported. 4. To identify ways in which the needs of victims could be more effectively met.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".